Apples new returns policy seems to be illegal (at least in the EU)

[JJ_Jettflow]

But this is not about all software on all systems. This is about Apple apps sold exclusively on an Apple site to Apple systems. Therefore it is a closed-end system with finite variables (older models, etc) that should be easy to make "bug free".

Says someone who, just like Jace, clearly has never written any non-trivial software ever.

It is not about me or anybody else writing software. It is about the way Apple is making sure they eliminate refunds, even for justified reasons.

[sprnva]

In what way does this differ from any other product? Theoretically, you could buy something, like for example a hard-drive, work with it for a week, and then return it to the store, and you would be entitled for a refund. It's the law, and Apple has to play according to it, as everybody else. If they don't agree with the law, it's up to them to not do business at all. If they choose to do it, they have to play according to the rules.

Exactly. There are countless posts on forums like these where people bought two or maybe three types of hardware from places like Amazon to see which one worked best for them. Then kept the one that worked best and returned the others. Apple's failure to allow a trial process/period is their own problem. People can't rely on reviews or even developer promises. Especially in an ecosystem like iOS where updates can break software.

The argument that digital goods can be copied and possibly kept after a refund is valid, but anyone that is going to do that could just as easily have pirated the same product without going through the hassle of paying for it and later claiming a refund. At the end of the day, the onus should be on providing the customer with a mechanism to return a purchase that they deem unsatisfactory. And ensuring that said customer doesn't find themselves in that position in the first place.

[whyterabbyt]

But this is not about all software on all systems. This is about Apple apps sold exclusively on an Apple site to Apple systems. Therefore it is a closed-end system with finite variables (older models, etc) that should be easy to make "bug free".

Says someone who, just like Jace, clearly has never written any non-trivial software ever.

It is not about me or anybody else writing software.

Actually the 'it' of the part of the conversation I was addressing, that you replied to, was about writing software.
Hence the words 'bug free' that we and even you used. Because doing the 'writing software' bit is where bugs would or would not be introduced. If 'bug free' is the 'it' then 'someone writing' is the same 'it'.

[whyterabbyt]

In what way does this differ from any other product? Theoretically, you could buy something, like for example a hard-drive, work with it for a week, and then return it to the store, and you would be entitled for a refund. It's the law, and Apple has to play according to it, as everybody else. If they don't agree with the law, it's up to them to not do business at all. If they choose to do it, they have to play according to the rules.

Exactly. There are countless posts on forums like these where people bought two or maybe three types of hardware from places like Amazon to see which one worked best for them. Then kept the one that worked best and returned the others. Apple's failure to allow a trial process/period is their own problem. People can't rely on reviews or even developer promises. Especially in an ecosystem like iOS where updates can break software.

The argument that digital goods can be copied and possibly kept after a refund is valid, but anyone that is going to do that could just as easily have pirated the same product without going through the hassle of paying for it and later claiming a refund. At the end of the day, the onus should be on providing the customer with a mechanism to return a purchase that they deem unsatisfactory. And ensuring that said customer doesn't find themselves in that position in the first place.

Then complain to the EU that their new legislation is flawed. Meanwhile, exactly as koalaboy has pointed out, as far as this thread is concerned, all Apple are actually doing is complying with these new EU regulations.

[aMUSEd]

Apple are playing the loopholes, by deeming the software to be 'digital content' which it is technically within the law - they are, of course, completely bypassing the spirit of the law.

Which clearly it is not, since digital content doesn't perform any task - its just for watching, or listening. Games and applications are not digital content, films ad music are, therefore, if someone raises this, EU courts will definitely have to force them to act conform to the law.

Instead of just constantly disagreeing with me, read the links I posted, and do some more research

Apple aren't breaking any laws - in fact they're just starting to comply with them.

Digital downloads are not included (and should not be provided until the customer acknowledges they don't have a cooling-off period for them).

It doesn't matter if it's pictures of your neighbours cat, or if it's the North Korean Nuclear reactor control system.

Anyway, I'm not going to keep trying to point this out - it's stated pretty clearly everywhere. I don't *agree* with the concept, but it's what the EU have decided is the case.

There does seem to be some ambiguity here though:

In addition, customers need to be clearly told about any functionality and relevant inoperability in respect to a digital download.

So what if they have not been told about any functionality and relevant inoperability? eg what if the description in the Appstore does not match what the software actually can, or can't, do?

For example I bought a FLAC music player for iPhone in the Appstore a few days ago for £8 that states in the store that it plays files from a NAS or SFTP drive, but when I tried it it only scans for SFTP. So I returned it and requested a refund, which I got, but now it appears I have this black mark on my account and am now getting these messages basically telling me if I download anything I will no longer be able to refund it.

[sprnva]

Apple are saying that, but can they actually do that? If you buy something else misleading or not fit for purpose and your refund request is denied, can you demand a refund under consumer protection/distance selling legislation?

Is that notice any more legally binding than their EULAs which everybody agrees to but never read?

[aMUSEd]

I don't know - I think koalaboy is right that Apple are clearly trying to comply with the first part of this clause:

Electronic downloads

Customers have the right to cancel orders up until the download process has started. The customer explicitly has to give consent to the commencement of the download, and needs to acknowledge that their right to the withdrawal from the contract terminates once the download commences.

In addition, customers need to be clearly told about any functionality and relevant inoperability in respect to a digital download.

Action: Make sure you have a pop-up box or tick box for the customer to acknowledge their rights.

https://www.practicology.com/thinking/b ... -explained

but the second part makes things less clear - for example if someone advertises a particular product will do such a thing or work on your system, and it doesn't, then that is contravening the second part of the clause. Surely if something is not functioning as advertised then a customer should be able to request a refund? Personally I tend to let it pass and put it down to experience to an extent, say if it's just a couple of pounds, but I don't see why anyone should have to, particularly for more expensive items.

Perhaps the best option would be for Apple to implement some sort of trial period for all downloads - say 14 days of full functionality after which you can confirm you are definitely buying it or not?

[sprnva]

That electronic download legislation sounds more appropriate for digital content like music and video. Which would make sense considering how hawkish media corporations are when it comes to protecting their interests. You're not going to know if a software product works as advertised until you run it.

Video games are largely distributed digitally now and most major outlets will allow refunds if the game doesn't perform. Look at the recent botched release of the new Batman game on PC. Even Valve got on board with refunds now, although their implementation needs some tweaking.

Anyway, I've always found Apple's support to be excellent so I would expect that if you run into any more issues with downloads they'll continue to refund you "on a case-by-case basis" so as not to make it the official line. That message may be to try and deter people from asking or trying to abuse the system, but I doubt it is as "final" as it suggests.

[koalaboy]

Anyway, I've always found Apple's support to be excellent so I would expect that if you run into any more issues with downloads they'll continue to refund you "on a case-by-case basis" so as not to make it the official line. That message may be to try and deter people from asking or trying to abuse the system, but I doubt it is as "final" as it suggests.

Exactly.

You may have to go past first-level support calls, but they can't weasle out of their legal requirements. If something actually doesn't work, or doesn't do what it says, it's generally a two-step process:

1) Go through their support, raising it higher, until they sort it out.

otherwise:

2) Either go via an organisation like Trading Standards in the UK and take them to small-claims court (which they'll then settle pretty much immediately), or make a chargeback on your card account (although this can have worse knock-on effects).

Either way, they can't bypass the law - they can just try to wiggle through it.

But you shouldn't buy anything unless you're sure it's what you want, and if there's no demo, then just don't buy it.

[raintalk]

Worst is Apple let's you purchase for a device you don't have. I have a iPad and a iPod and recently I purchased an app that only works for iphone. It was not obvious it was only for iphone. Worst is it halfway installs on iPad and iPod just the install never finished. Their support had to tell me it's not for iPad. Why did apple let me buy it? They know what devices I have.

They did refund the purchase but made a point to say that "all sales are final" and they do not normally do refunds. It's just bad business, illegal or not.

[Jace-BeOS]

But this is not about all software on all systems. This is about Apple apps sold exclusively on an Apple site to Apple systems. Therefore it is a closed-end system with finite variables (older models, etc) that should be easy to make "bug free".

Says someone who, just like Jace, clearly has never written any non-trivial software ever.

It doesn't take a software developer to recognize that this industry is seriously screwing consumers. In fact, developers are the ones least likely to think about the reality of it because they're personally invested in the belief system of special pleading to excuse software from being treated like other goods.

But whatever. Just keep dismissing me because I don't build complex software. Just like the abuse I got from AQ in the developer forum for suggesting that sand boxing was the right thing to do for consumers. It ultimately doesn't matter because my opinion won't shape the future laws you developers will have to live by (or your grandchildren developers, or whatever). I'm pissed because I'm always on the "screwed" end of everything, I identify with others that feel the same, and I have no life of my own but to speak up for consumers and minorities and whoever about ethics and justice on Internet forums, as if my contribution means any damn thing.

Merry effing new year of more of the same shit.

[whyterabbyt]

Just keep dismissing me because I don't build complex software.

No, Im dismissing you because of the kneejerk sweeping statements and generalisations you bring to every goddamn thread that even gets close to it. Yes we know you think everybody in an entire industry is corrupt, incompetent, evil, rude and fraudulent, it just be nice to see some threads which didnt get interjected with posts that actually remind me quite so strongly of the kind of openly espoused stereotyping and racism I grew up with as a kid.

Merry effing new year of more of the same shit.

Yeah, well as someone who basically falls under the category of one of the scapegoats for your unending kneejerk vitriol, merely because of what I do for a living, it isnt so f**king merry to wind up reading day in day out, follow? Thanks for not even taking a day off over the holidays when someone might have been so dumb as to have started relaxing and enjoying themselves..

The wierd thing is, I actually think you're a decent guy. But you're that rabidly insulting with this constant shit that I literally sometimes think you need a punch in the face.

And with that, Im sure this'll be the second christmas where I'll get banned for going from quite a happy little bunny to getting fed up with being on the receiving end, obliqiuely or not, of someone's else's incapacity to let anything go without bringing their baggage to the table purely for the sake of it, in minutes, courtesy of the constant bitterness folk bring to KVR.

"Merry effing new year of more of the same shit is right". Would have been a bit less hypocritical if you hasnt just parked the manure truck on the end of the street and weighed in with a pitchfork.

[trimph1]

Wow. Did not realize that the holiday season and such could be such a radical concept.

@Jace...Whatever ... try to imagine that it is possible to enjoy the holidays without any further venom.

Please...

[bungle]

Does anybody here believe for one minute that Apple can't just do whatever they want ?
They will, they may even end up in legal procedure, that wont stop them either.
Worrying about Apples policies after you have purchased an Apple product is kind of fixing the door on the barn after the horse has done one hahaha (No Apple hating, I use some Apple product and knew exactly what that entailed)